Hiring & Recruitment

Re-evaluate the way the Rule of Three and Veteran's Preference is Applied

Our veterans deserve to be given additional consideration for federal jobs due to their sacrifices for the country. This mandated Rule of Three, however is giving an unfair advantage to veterans, pre-dominantly male, and significantly hindering the government's ability to hire younger talent. I have seen a number of comments/concerns about the government's tendency to hire internally rather than externally, this is one of the reasons. When a vacancy is posted for the public, more often than not, veterans are placed at the top of the list, due to their point preference. This, in and of itself, is not bad and is a legitimate use of the point preference. The problem lies in the Rule of Three. If a veteran falls in the top three, any other candidates are excluded from consideration because we can't hire someone over a veteran. Where this becomes a problem is that 1) the veteran often has less experience or qualifications, thus their points are the only reason they have made it into the top 3; 2) the scores for the top three are determined based only on resume's, the scored questions, and without any input from the manager; 3) when a manager interviews the applicants, if the veteran does not interview well or is significantly less qualified, the manager has no option to hire someone else who is legitimately more qualified but is not a veteran.


Proposed solution: Continue applying the point preference for veterans, however, do not restrict the manager from hiring another applicant they feel is more competent for the position.



-3 votes
Idea No. 620